Where Liberalism Is Alive and Well!

The Glenn Greenwald Some On The Left Don’t Know! (Update I)

I learned a lot about Glenn Greenwald today with so many cool people writing great stuff and others sharing it on Twitter and blogs. I decided that I would compile all the great links I came across today as a way to gather the information in a unified place. I may update it too, feel free to contribute links in the comments or email them to me if you want to stay anonymous. I’ve compiled a lot of links on Jane Hamsher too, I may have to lay them out too…one of these days.

This one is about his most famous case as a lawyer, he’s said some interesting things over the years.

Man I wish we didn’t have to waste our time with this man, but since he keeps claiming to speak for the left or at least letting that implication lay out there when people refer to him as left, I feel inclined to continue exposing him. I’m sure glad that I’m not the only one that finds him repulsive and is willing to speak out about him.

Update:

This link is really excellent, I’ll be posting about it tomorrow. From Benjamin Wittes at Lawfare. It exposes Glenn Greenwald’s tactics of argument.

Post navigation

13 thoughts on “The Glenn Greenwald Some On The Left Don’t Know! (Update I)”

It’s funny how some on the left throw Clinton(I know he’s not popular in some circles but I still liked the man), Gore and Obama under the Republican lite bus but they have no problem defending a guy like Greenwald.

Libertarians are the kissing cousin of conservatives outside some points here and there.

I fear some think Libertarians are LIBERAL because many of them want to legalize marijuana. “Liberals” changing parties over one issue is dangerous. I agree with those like Ron Paul who want us to stay out of foreign wars, but you have many hybrids of Libertarians-Republicans who like McCain, want to bomb everywhere, make us the policemen of the World. Libertarians also want PRIVACY rights except maybe when politicians interfere between a woman and her doctor/pastor, then there is no such right. So often they are hypocrites!

Ron Paul is my Congresscritter and I admit voting for him in 2006 because the blue-dog inexperienced Democrat running that year was pro Iraq War (so I voted one issue…a mistake). Paul was unopposed in 2008 and won again in a landslide last fall, outspending his obscure opponent. Paul’s Gulf Coast district used to go Democratic (but Gerrymandering has helped define the area as Republican). This district has many Union members in the oil/chemical refineries, longshoremen, and many minorities. Once upon a time, this was one of the most Democratic sections of Texas along with the Golden Triangle of Port Arthur/Beaumont/Orange. Now Democrats mostly only hold on to Hispanic South Texas and inner city Houston, Dallas, Austin, and San Antonio. Linked below is Paul’s gerrymandered district map. It is over 200 miles along the “Democratic” coast and 60 miles wide inland (to include more Republicans) with a loop around Sugar Land to include the white Republican suburban areas near Katy. With total right-wing control in Austin, the four new districts to be added to the Texas delegation will have much Republican input. People forget about such things as district maps and political/judicial appointments when they vote against their party “to send a message!”

To buy favor in his district, anti-Federal Ron Paul is also one of the biggest “earmarkers” in the Texas Congressional delegation, bringing “home” $17 MILLION last year alone, second to John Culberson’s $34 MILLION. Those “big-spender” Republicans!

But favoring decriminalizing marijuana doesn’t make one a liberal. Probably as many conservative pot smokers as liberals.

Read today that not only does Donald Trump not go to church very often, he has rarely voted in the past two decades. Greenwald claims to be neither a Democrat or Republican and has also skipped voting.

Your blog post does not read like the post of a liberal. It reads like the post of someone who has to reach back years to try and find some things to attack someone who is currently saying things you find both uncomfortable and impossible to refute.

You think it’s bad that Greenwald defended the first amendment rights of people engaging in speech you don’t like? That’s not a liberal position. Quite the opposite.

You link to one long ad hominem attack at TeamObama2012 (Glenn Greenwald Is A Republican Tool) and think it means something other than a demonstration of fallacy? That’s also not liberal. Unthinking attack never is.

Dude, apparently you missed the first couple of sentences where I said these were the links I came across on Twitter yesterday, I was just compiling them. I don’t claim to know the veracity of any of them, I was just sharing them with people.

ON Glenn defending Matt Hale, I’m definitely for all defendants having good legal representation…there are a couple lawyers in my family, what caught my eye in that story was what Glenn is quoted as saying during that trial, not the fact that he was defending him.

And the TeamObama2012 link I thought was pretty funny, I respect my readers enough to be able to sort out ad hominum attacks themselves…another liberal concept, I thought is was nice and snarky and had some truth to it.

And I don’t even know who Roman Berry is, do tell us why you are qualified to pronounce someone or another liberal or not. Who died and made you Glenn Greenwald’s defender?

Oh, and Glenn Greenwald is not liberal, he even says so, maybe you don’t know or are helping him to play to the liberals so he can line his fucking pockets off the backs of populist liberal outrage.

Wow the one thing I notice over the past couple of days is that any blog that post anything that’s remotely negative about Glenn Greenwald, his fans show up to troll.

I’ve experience this new meme(I guess it’s not really new) of having my liberal status questioned or have someone tell me stop calling myself a liberal because I disagree with their false progressive idols.

Isn’t being a liberal means I can have a different opinion from you or see things different? But I gotta ask Mr.Berry how many liberals do you know bash the President for not being progressive enough while supporting a candidate that’s a far right wing loon?

Greenwald defended Hale in this so called “First Amendment” case claiming solicitation of murder was protected speech.
From the above NYT link:
“Glenn Greenwald, a lawyer for Mr. Hale, said the charges filed today might stem from a misinterpretation of a statement by his client on the Internet that ”we are in a state of war with Judge Lefkow.'”

Matthew Hale was later convicted and sentenced to 40 years for soliciting an FBI informant to murder Federal Judge Joan Lefkow. So Glenn is not a very good Civil Rights attorney either since he claimed the solicitation of murder was a violation of Free Speech and not a crime. Coincidentally, Greenwald closed up his law practice just after losing this case claiming he was tired of litigating full time. http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/07/response-to-right-wing-personal.html

It couldn’t possibly be that he made an ass out of himself defending a man who solicited murder from an FBI informant as being nothing more than a misinterpretation of something said on a website? Or could it?

Are you really okay with Greenwald calling the solicitation to murder a Federal Judge “a misunderstanding” and a violation of the 1st Amendment? Do you actually believe that yourself? If you do then you really need to question your own belief in the principles of the left wing/ Democratic Party. We here on the left don’t believe solicitation to murder judges is a matter of Free Speech.

I learned long ago not to waste my vote on third party candidates, at least not above the local level. IMO, unless we would go to a parliamentary system (probably too radical to ever happen), we are only going to have a two party system in this nation, with third parties most often being spoilers (Perot hurt Bush, Nader hurt Gore).

When I changed my Republican registration to Democratic in the late 60’s, I was so upset with the Democratic Convention in 1968, the assassination of King and Robert Kennedy, that I “protested” by voting for third party peace candidate, Eugene McCarthy. I learned then that my vote against Humphrey was in essence a vote FOR Richard Nixon! I voted third party again in 1980 for Republican John Anderson. As I was driving home from work through Malibu ON MY WAY TO VOTE, heard “breaking news” over the radio that Ronald Reagan had ALREADY won, so only to ensure that Anderson gets his federal election funds (he needed 5% of the vote, got 7%), I voted for Anderson (BTW a Rockefeller Republican much more liberal than Raygun).

I get upset too with Obama at times BUT I know that we could be in a far worse place if we elect any of the pawns of the corps-fascists to the White House and Congress. I guess the “professional left” care more about their egos (and blogger income) than about what really happens to our nation.